E 



>e\Ay cor 



L W^^' 



•taw>. 






Vla^'ti 



/ 



(ilov 



.\v<l\<X\PV\ 



\S54. 




BookjBXLL— 



I 

SPEECH 



OF 




H. SEWAED 



ON THfc 



KANSAS AND NEBRASKA BILL. 



SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, MAY 26, 1854. 



Mr. President : 

I rise with no purpose of further resisting or 
even delaying the passage of this bill. Let its 
advocates have only a little patience, and they 
will soon reach the attainment of the object for 
which they have struggled so earnestly and 
so long. The sun has set for the last time 
upon the guarantied and certain liberties of 
all the unsettled and unorganized portions 
of the American continent that lie within the 
jurisdiction of the United States. To-morrow's 
sun Avill rise in dim eclipse over them. How 
long that obscuration shall last, is known only to 
the Power that directs and controls all human 
events. For myself, I know only this — that no 
human power can jirevent its coming on, and that 
its passing off will be hastened and secured by 
others than those now here, and perhaps by only 
those belonging to future generations. 

Sir, it would be almost factious to offer farther 
resistance to this measure here. Indeed, success- 
ful resistance was never expected to be made in 
this Hall. The Senate floor is an old battle ground, 
on which have been fought many contests, and 
always, at least since 1820, with fortune adverse 
to the cause of equal and universal freedom. We 
were only a few here who engaged in that cause 
in the beginning of this contest. All that we 
could hope to do — all that we did hope to do — 
was to organize and to prepare the issue for the 
House of Representatives, to which the country 
would look for its decision as authoritative, and 
to awaken the country that it might be ready for 
the appeal which would be made, whatever the 
dfcf^ision of Congress might be. We are no 
stronger now. Only fourteen at the first, it will 
be fortunate if, among 'the ills and accidents 
which surround us, we sliall maintain that num- 
ber to the end. 

We are on the eve of the consummation of a 
jreat national transaction — a transaction which 
will close a cycle in the history of our country — 
ind it is impossible not to desire to pause a mo- 



ment and survey the scene around us and tlio 
prospect before us. However obscure we may 
individually be, our connection with this great 
transaction will perpetuate our names for the 
praise or for thtf censure of future ages, and i>er- 
haps in regions far remote. If, then, we had no 
other motive for our actions but that of an honest 
desire for a just fame, we could not be indifl'ereut 
to that scene and that prospect. But individual 
interests and ambition sink into insignificance in 
view of the interests of our country and of man- 
kind. These interests awaken, at least in me, an 
intense solicitude. 

It was said by some, in the beginning, and it 
has been said by others later in this debate, that 
it was doubtful whether it would be the cause of 
Slavery or the cause of Freedom that would gain 
advantages from the passage of this bill. I do not 
find it necessary to be censorious, nor even unjust 
to others, in order that my own course may be ap- 
proved. I am sure that the honorable Senator from 
Illinois [Mr. Douglas] did not mean that the 
slave States should gain an advantage over the 
free States, for he disclaimed it when he intro- 
duced the bill. I believe, in all candor, that the 
honorable Senator from Georgia, [Mr. Toomh-s,] 
who comes out at the close of the battle as one 
of the chiefest leaders of the victorious party, is 
sincere in declaring his own opinion that the 
slave States will gain no unjust advantage over 
the free States, because he disclaims it as a tri- 
umph in their behalf. Notwithstanding all this, 
however, what has occurred here and in the 
country, during this contest, has compelled a con- 
viction that Slavery will gain something, and 
Freedom will endure a severe, though I hope not 
an irretrievable loss. The slaveholding States 
are passive, quiet, content, and satisfied with the 
prospective boon, and the free States are excited 
and alarmed with fearful forebodings and appre- 
hensions. The impatience for the speedy pas- 
sage of the bill manifested by its friends betrays 
a knowledge that this is the condition of public 






6^ 



sentiment in the free States. Thej thoufrht in 
the beginning that it was necessary to guard the 
measure by inserting the Clayton amendment, 
which would exclude unnaturalized foreign inhab- 
itants of the Territories from the right of suffrage. 
And now they seem willing, with almost perfect 
unanimity, to relinquish that safeguard, rather 
than to delay the adoption of the principal mcas- 
sure for at most a year, perhaps for only a week 
or a daj'. Suppose that the Senate should adhere 
to that condition, which so lately was tliought so 
wise and so important — what then? The bill 
could only go back to the House of Representa- 
tives, which must either yield or insist! In the 
one case or in the other, a decision in favor of the 
bill would be secured, for even if the House should 
disagree, the Senate would have time to recede. 
But the majority will hazard nothing, even on a 
prospect so certain as this. They will recede at 
once, without a moment's further struggle, from 
the condition, and thus secure the passage of 
this bill now, to-night. "Why such haste ? Even 
if the question were to go to the country belbre 
a final decision here, what would there be wrong 
in that ? There is no man living who will say 
that the country anticipated, or that ho, antici- 
pated agitation of this measure in Congress, 
when this Congress was elected, or even when it 
assembled in December last. 

Under such circumstances, and in the midst of 
agitation, and excitement, and debates, it is only 
fair to say that certainly the country has not de- 
cided in favor of the bill. The refusal, then, to 
let the question go to the country, is a conclusive 
proof that the slave States, as represented here, 
expect from the passage of this bill what the free 
States insist that they will lose by it, an advantage, 
a material advantage, and not a mere abstraction. 
There are men in the slave States, as in the free 
States, who insist always too pertinaciouslj' upon 
mere abstractions. But that is not the policy of 
the slave States to-day. They are in earnest in 
seeking for and securing an object, and an im- 
portant one. I believe they are going to have it. 
I ao not know how long the advantage gained 
will last, nor how great or comprehensive it v.-ill 
be. Every Senator who agrees with me in opin- 
ion must feel as I do — that under such circum- 
stances he can forego nothing that can be done 
decently, with due respect to difference of opin- 
ion, and consistently with the constitutional and 
settled rules of legislation, to place the true mer- 
its of the question before the country. Questions 
sometimes occur, which seem to have two right 
sides. Such were the questions that divided the 
English nation between Pitt and Fox — such 
the contest between the assailant and the defend- 
er of Quebec. The judgment of the world was 
suspended by its sympathies, and seemed ready 
to descend in favor of him who should be most 
gallant in conduct. And so, when both fell with 
equal chivalry on the same field, the survivors 
united in raising a common monument to the 
glorious but rival memories of Wolfe and Mont- 
calm. But this contest involves a moral ques- 
tion. The slave States so present it. They 
maintain that African slavery is not erroneous, 
not nnjust, not inconsistent with the advancing 



cause of human nature. Since they so regard it, 
1 do not expect to see statesmen representing 
those States indifferent about a vindication of this 
system by the Congress of the United States. On 
the other hand, Ave of the free States regard Sla- 
very as erroneous, unjust, oppressive, and there- 
lore absolutely inconsistent with the principles of 
the American Constitution and ■'Government. 
Who will expect us to be indifferent to the decis- 
ions of the American people and of mankind on 
such an issue ? 

Again : there is suspended on the issue of this 
contest the political equilibrium between the tree 
and the slave States. It is no ephemeral ques- 
tion, no idle question, whether Slavery shall go 
on increasing its influence over the central pow- 
er here, or whether Freedom shall gain the as- 
cendency. I do not expect to sec statesmen of 
the slave States indifferent on so momentous a 
question, and as little can it be expected that 
those of the free States will betray their great 
cause. And now it remains for me to declare, 
in view of the decision of this controversy so 
near at hand, that T have seen nothing and heard 
nothing during its progress to change the opin- 
ions which at the earliest proper period I delib- . 
erately expressed. Certainly, I have not seen 
the evidence then promised, that the free States 
would acquiesce in the measure. As certainly, 
too, I may say that I have not seen the fulfil- 
ment of the promise that the history of the last 
thirty years would be revised, corrected, and 
amended, and that it would then appear that the 
country, during all that period, had been resting 
in prosperity and contentment and peace, not up- 
on a valid, constitutional, and irrevocable com- 
promise between the slave States and the free j 
States, but upon an unconstitutional and false, 
and even infamous, act of Congressional usurpa- 
tion. 

On the contrary, I am now, if possible, more 
than ever satisfied that, after all this debate, the 
history of the country will go down to posterity 
just as it stood before, carrying to them the ever- 
lasting foots that until 1820 the Congress of the 
United States legislated to prevent the introduc- 
tion of Slavery into new Territories whenever 
that object was practicable; and that in that 
year they so far modified that policy, under 
alarming apprehensions of civil convulsion, bj^ a 
constitutional enactment in the character of a 
compact, as to admit Missouri a new slave State ; 
but upon the express condition, stipulated in 
favor of the free States, that Slavery should be 
forever prohibited in all the residue of the exist- 
ing and unorganized Territories of the United 
States lying north of the parallel of 36° 30' north 
latitude. Ccrtainlv, I find nothing to win my 
favor toward the "bill in the proposition of the 
Senator from JIaryland, [Mr. Pkarce,] to restore 
the Clayton amendment, which was struck out m 
the House of Representatives. So far from votmg 
for that proposition, I shall vote against it now, 
as I did when it was under consideration here 
before, in accordance with the opinion adopted 
as early as anv political opinions I ever had, and 
cherished as "long, that the right of suffrage is 
not a mere con-ventional right, btit an inherent 



natural vWU. of ^hich no GoTernment cnn right- 
ly deprive^ any adult man who is subject ^to its 
authority, and obligated to its support. 

I hold, moreover, sir, that inasmuch as every 
man i« by force of circumstances beyond his own 
control, a subject of Government somewhere, he 
is by the very constitution of human society, 
entitled to share equally in the conferring of po- 
litical power on those who wield it, if he is not 
disqualified by crime ; that in a despotic Govern- 
ment he ought to be allowed arms, in a free Gov- 
ernment the ballot or the open vote, as a means 
of self-protection against unendurable oppres- 
sion. I am not likely, therefore, to restore to 
this bill an amendment which would deprive it 
of an important feature imposed upon it by the 
House of Representatives, and that one, perhaps, 
the only feature that harmonizes with my own 
convictions of justice. It is true that the House 
of Representatives stipulate such suflrage tor 
white men as a condition for opening it to the 
nossible proscription and slavery of the African, 
i shall separate them. I shall vote for the lor- 
mer, and against the latter, glad to get universal 
suffrage of white men, if only that can be gained 
now. and working right on, full of hope and con- 
fidence, for the prevention or the abrogation of 
Slavery in the Territories hereafter. 

Sir,' I am surprised at the pertinacity with 
which the honorable Senator from Delaware, 
mine ancient and honorable friend, [Mr. Clayton,] 
perseveres in opposing the granting of the right 
of suflrage to the unnaturalized foreigner in the 
Territorie^-. Congress cannot deny him that right. 
Here is the third article of that convention by 
which Louisiana, including Kansas and Nebras- 
ka, was ceded to the United States. 

" The inhabitants of the ceded territory shall 
' be incorporated in the Union of the United 
' States, and admitted as soou as possible, ac- 
' cording to the principles of the Federal Consti- 
' tution, to the enjoyment of the rights, privileges, 
' and immunities, of citizens of the United States ; 
' and in the mean time ihey shall be maintained 
' and protected in the free enjoyment of their lib- 
' erty, property, and the religion they profess." 

The inhabitants of Kansas and Nebraska are 
citizens already, and by force of this treaty must 
continue to he, and as such to enjoy the right of 
suffrage, whatever laws you may make to the 
contrary. My opinions are well known, to wit : 
That Slavery" is not only an evil, but a local one, 
injurious and ultimately pernicious to society, 
wherever it exists, and in conflict with the con- 
stitutional principles of society in this country. I 
am not willing to extend nor to permit the exten- 
sion of that local evil into regions now free within 
our empire. I know that there are some who 
differ from me, and who regard the Constitution 
of the United States as an instrument which sanc- 
tions Slaveiy as well as Freedom. But if I could 
admit a proposition so incongruous with the letter 
and spirit of the Federal Constitution, and the 
known sentiments of its illustrious founders, and 
so should conclude that Slavery was national, I 
must still cherish the opinion that it is an evil ; 
and because it is a national one, I am the more 
firmly held and bound to prevent an increase of 



it, tending, as I think it manifestly does, to the 
weakening and ultimate overthrow of the Consti- 
tution itself, and therefore to the injury of all ■ 
mankind. I know there have been States which 
have endured long, and achieved much, v.diich 
tolerated Slavery ; but that was not the slavery of 
caste, like African Slavery. Such Slavery tends 
to demoralize equally the subjected race and the 
superior one. It has been the absence of such 
Slavery from Europe that has given her nations 
their superioritfji over other countries in that 
hemisphere. Slavery, wherever it exists, begets 
fear, and fear is the parent of vreakness. What 
is the secret of that eternal, sleepless anxiety in 
the legislative halls, and even at the firesides, of 
the slave States, always asking new stipulations, 
new compromises and abrogation of compromises, 
new assumptions of power and abnegations of 
power, but fear? It is the apprehension that, 
even if safe now, they will not always or long be 
secure against some invasion or some aggression 
from the free States. What is the secret of the 
humiliating part which proud old Spain is acting 
at this day, trembling between alarms of Ameri- 
can intrusion into Cuba on one side, and British 
dictation on the other, but the fact that she has 
cherished Slavery so long, and still cherishes it, 
in the last of her American colonial possessions ? 
Thus far. Kansas and Nebraska are safe, under 
the laws of 1820, against the introduction of this 
element of national debility and decline. The 
bill before us, as we are assured, contains a great 
principle, a glorious principle: and yet that prin- 
ciple, when fully ascertained, proves to be noth- 
ing less than the subversion of that security, not 
only within the Territories of Kansas and Nebras- 
ka,"but within all the other present and future new 
Territories of the United States. Thus it is quito 
clear that it is not a principle alone tliat is in- 
volved, but that those who crovv'd this measure 
with so much zeal and earnestness must expect 
that either Freedom or Slavery shall gain some- 
thing by it in those regions. The case, then, 
stands thus in Kansas and Nebraska : Freedom 
may lose, but certainly can gain nothing ; while 
Slavei-y may gain, but as certainly can lose noth- 
ing. 

So far as I am concerned, the time for looking 
on the dark side has passed. I feel quite sure 
that Slavery at most can get nothing more than 
Kansas ; while Nebraska, the wider northern re- 
gion, will, under existing circumstances, escape, 
for the reason that its soil and climate are un- 
congenial with the staples of slave culture — rice, 
sugar, cotton, and tobacco. Moreover, since the 
public attention has been so well and so cfr;;ctually 
directed tovrard the subject, I cherish a hope that 
Slavery may be prevented even from gaining a 
foothold in" Kansas. Congress only gives con- 
sent, but it does not and cannot introduce Sla- 
very there. Slavery will be embarrassed by its 
own over-grasping spirit. No one, 1 am sure, 
anticipates the possible re-establishment of the 
African slave trade. The tide of emigration to 
Kansas is therefore to be supplied there solely by 
the domestic fountain of slave production. But 
Sla-very has also other regions besides Kausas to 
be filled from that fountain. There is all of New 



Mexico nnd all of Utah already within the United 
States; and then there is Cuba, that consumes 
slave labor and life as fast as any one of the 
slaveholding kStatcs can supjjly it ; and besides 
these regions, there remains all of .Mexico down 
to the Isthmus. The stream of slave labor flow- 
ing from so small a fountain, and broken into 
several divergent channels, will not cover so 
great a field; and it is reasonably to be hoped 
that the part of it nearest to the North Pole will 
be the last to be inundated. But African slave 
emigration is to com])ete with free emigration of 
white men, and the source of this latter tide is 
as ample as the civilization of the two entire con- 
tinents. The honorable Senator from Delaware 
mentioned, as if it were a startling fact, that 
twenty thousand Eurojjean immigrants arrived 
in New York in one month. Sir, he has stated 
the fact with too much moderation. On my re- 
turn to the capital a day or two ago, I met 
twelve thousand of these immigrants who had 
arrived in New York on one morning, and wlio 
had thronged the churches on the following Sab- 
bath, to return thanks for deliverance from the 
perils of the sea, and for their arrival in the 
land, not of Slavery, but of Liberty. I also 
thank God for their escape, and for their com- 
ing. They are now on their way westward, and 
the news of the passage of this bill, preceding 
them, will speed many of them towards Kansas 
and Nebraska. Such arrivals are not extraordi- 
narj" — they occur almost every week ; and the 
immigration from Germany, from Great Britain, 
and from Norway, and from Sweden, during the 
European war, will rise to six or seven hundred 
thousand souls in a j^ear. And with this tide is 
to be mingled one rapidlj- swelling from Asia 
and from the islands of the South Seas. All the 
immigrants, under this bill as the House of Rep- 
resentatives overruling you have ordered, will be 
good, loyal. Liberty-loving, Slavery-fearing citi- 
zens. Come on, then, gentlemen of the slave 
States. Since there is no escaping your chal- 
lenge, I accept it in behalf of the cause of Free- 
dom. We will engage in competition for the 
virgin soil of Kansas, and God give the victory 
to the side which is stronger in numbers as it is 
in right. 

There are, however, earnest advocates of this 
bill, who do not expect, and who, I suppose, do 
not desire, that Slavery shall gain possession of 
Nebraska. What do they expect to gain? The 
honorable Senator from Indiana [Mr. Pettit] 
says that by thus obliterating the Missoui-i Com- 
I)romise restriction, they will gain a tabula rasa, 
on which the inhabitants of Kansas and Nebraska 
may write whatever they will. This is the great 
principle of the bill, as he understands it. Well, 
what gain is there in that? You obliterate a 
Constitution of Freedom. If they write a new 
Constitution of Freedom, can the new be better 
than the old? If they write a Constitution of 
Slavery, will it not be a worse one ? I ask the 
honorable Senator that ! But the honorable Sen- 
ator says that the i)Co])le of Nebraska will have 
the privilege of establishing institutions for them- 
selves. They have now the privilege of estab- 
lishing free institutions. Is it a privilege, then, 



to establish Slavery? If so, what a mockery are 
all our Constitutions, which prevent the inhabit- 
ants from capriciously subverting free institu- 
tions and establishing institutions of Slavery? 
Sir, it is a sophism, a subtlety, to talk of con- 
ferring upon a country, already secure in the 
blessings of Freedom, the power of self-destruc- 
tion. 

AYhat mankind everywhere want, is not the re- 
moval of the Constitutions of Freedom which 
they have, that they may make at their pleasure 
Constitutions of Slavery or of Freedom, but the 
privilege of .retaining Constitutions of Freedom 
when they already have them, and the removal 
of Constitutions of Slavery when they have them, 
that they may establish Constitutions of Freedom 
in their place. We hold on tenaciouslv to all 
existing Constitutions of Freedom. Who de- 
nounces any man for. diligently adhering to such 
Constitutions? Who would dare to denounce 
any one for disloyalty to our existing Constitu- 
tions, if they were Constitutions of Despotism and 
Slavery? But it is supposed by some that this 
principle is less important in regard to Kansas 
and Nebraska than as a general one — a general 
principle applicable to all other present and fu- 
ture Territories of the United States. Do honor- 
able Senators then indeed suppose they are es- 
tablishing a principle at all ? If so, I think they 
egregiously err, whether the principle is either 
good or bad, right or wrong. They are not estab- 
lishing it, and cannot establish it in this way. You 
subvert one law capriciously, by making another 
law in its place. That is all. Will your law 
have any more weight, authority, solemnity, or 
binding force on future Congresses, than the first 
had ? You abrogate the law of your predeces- 
sors — others will have ecjual power and equal 
liberty to abrogate yours. Yon allow no barriers 
around the old law, to pi'otect it from a!n-ogation. 
You ci'ect none around your new law, to stay the 
hand of future innovators. 

On what ground do you expect the new law to 
stand? If you are candid, you will confess that 
j'ou rest your assumption on the ground that the 
free States will never agitate repeal, but always 
acquiesce. It may be that you are right. I am 
not going to predict the course of the free States. 
I claim no authority to speak for them, and still 
less to say what they will do. But I may venture 
to say, that if they shall not repeal this law, it 
will not be because they are not strong enough 
to do it. They have power in the House of Eep- 
rescntatives greater than that of the slave States, 
and, when they choose to exercise it, a power 
greater even here in the Senate. The free States 
are not dull scholars, even in practical political 
strategy. When you shall have taught them that 
a compromise law establishing Freedom can be 
abrogated, and the Union nevertheless stand, you 
will have let them into another secret, namely : 
that a law permitting or establishing Slavery can 
be repealed, and the Union nevertheless remain 
firm. If ytni inquire why they do not stand by 
their rights and their interests "more firmly, I will 
tell you to the best of my alulity. It is because 
they' arc conscious of their strength, and., there- 
fore, unsuspecting, and slow to apprehend dau- 



ttp»«hanq:' 



.At 



ger. The reason why you prevail in so many 
contests, is because you are in perpetual fear. 

There cannot be a convocation of Abolitionists, 
however impracticable, in Faneuil Hall or the 
Tabernacle, though it consists of men and women 
who have separated themselves from all effective 
political parties, and who have renounced all po- 
litical agencies, even though they resolve that 
they wiUvote for nobody, not even for themselves, 
to carry out their purposes, and though they prac;- 
tice on that resolution, but you take alarm, and 
your agitation renders necessary such compro- 
mises as those of 1820 and of 1850. We are young 
jn the arts of politics ; you are old. We are strong; 
vou are weak. We are, therefore, over-confident, 
careless, and inditferent ; you are vigilant and 
active. These are all traits that redound to your 
praise. They are mentioned not in your dispar- 
ao-eraent. I say only that there may be an extent 
of intervention, of aggression, on your side, which 
may induce the North, at some time, either in this 
or in some future generation, to adopt your tactics 
and follow your example. Remember now, that 
by unanimous consent, this new law will be a 
repealable statute, exposed to all the chances of 
the Missouri compromise. It stands an infinite]}- 
worse chance of endurance than that compromise 
did. 

The Missouri compromise was a transaction 
which wise, learned, patriotic statesmen agreed 
to surround and fortify with the jirinciples of a 
compact for mutual considerations, passed and 
execuied, aud therefore, although not irrepealable 
in fact, yet irrepealable in honor and conscience, 
and down at least until this very session of the 
Congress of the United States, it kfis had the 
force and authority not merely of an act of Con- 
gress, but of a covenant between the free States 
and the slave States, scarcely less sacred than the 
Constitution itself. Now, then, who are \our 
contracting parties in the law establishing Gov- 
ernments in Kansas and Nebraska, and abroga- 
ting the Missouri compromise? What are the 
equivalents in this law ? What has the North 
given, and what has the South got back, that 
makes this a contract? Who pretends that it is 
anything more than an ordinary act of ordinary 
legislation? If, then, a law which has all the 
forms and solemnities recognised fh- common 
consent as a compact, and is covered with tra- 
ditions, cannot stand amid this shuffling of this 
balance between the free States and the slave 
States, tell me what chance this new law that 
rou are passing will have? 

You are. moreover, setting a precedent which 
abrogates all compromises. Four years ago, you 
obtained the consent of a portion of the free 
States — enough to render the effort at immediate 
repeal or resistance alike impossible — to what we 
egarded as an unconstitutional act for the sur- 
•ender of fugitive slaves. That was declared, by 
ho common consent of the persons acting in the 
lame of the two i)arties, the slave States and the 
ree States in Congress, an irrepealable law — not 
!ven to be questioned, altliough it violated the 
-""onstitution. In establishing this new principle, 
■ou expose that law also to the chances of repeal 
fou not only so expose the fugitive slave law, 



but there is no solemnity about the articles for 
the annexation of Texas to the United States, 
which does not hang about the Missouri compro- 
mise ; and when you have shown that the .Mis- 
souri compromise can be repealed, then the ar- 
ticles for the annexation of Texas are subject to 
the will and pleasure and the caprice of a tem- 
porary majority in Congress. Do you, then, ex- 
pect that the free States are to observe compacts, 
and you to be at liberty to break them ; that they 
are to submit to laws and leave them on the 
statute-book, however unconstitutional and how- 
ever grevious, and that you are to rest under no 
such obligation? I think it is not a reasonable 
expectation. Say, then, who from the North will 
be bound to admit Kansas, when Kansas shall 
come in here, if she shall come as a slave 
State ? 

The honorable Senator from Georgia, [Mr. 
Toombs,] and I know he is as sincere as he is 
ardent, says if he shall be here when Kansas 
comes as a free State, he will vote for her admis- 
sion. I doubt not that he would ; btit he Avill 
not be here, for the very reason, if there be no 
other, that he would vote that way. When Oregon 
or Minnesota shall come here for admission — with- 
in one year, or two years, or three years from 
this time — we shall then see what your new prin- 
ciple is worth in its obligation upon the slave- 
holding States. No; you establish no principle, 
you only abrogate a principle which was estab- 
lished tor your own security as well as ours; and 
while you think you are abnegating and resigning 
all power and all authority on this subject into the 
hands of the people of the Territories, you are 
only getting over a difficulty in settling this ques- 
tion in the organization of two new Territories, 
by postponing it till they come here to be admit- 
ted as States, slave or free. 

Sir, in saying that your new principle will not 
be established by this bill, I reason from obvious, 
clear, well-settled principles of human nature. 
Slavery and Freedom are antagonistical elements 
in this country. The founders of the Constitu- 
tion framed it with a knowledge of that antag- 
onism, and suffered it to continue, that it might 
work out its own ends. There is a commercial 
antagonism, an irreconcilable one, between tlie 
systems of free labor and slave labor. They 
have been at war with each other ever since the 
Government was established, and that war is to 
continue forever. The contest, when it ripens 
between these two antagonistic elements, is to 
be settled somewhere ; it is to be settled in the 
seat of central power, in the Federal Legislature. 
The Constitution makes it the duty of the central 
Government to determine questions as often as 
they shall arise in favor of one or the other party, 
and refers the decision of them to the majority 
of the votes in the two Houses of Congress. It 
will come back here, then, in spite of all the ef- 
forts to escape from it. 

This antagonism must end either in a separa- 
tion of the antagonistic parties — the slaveholding 
States and the free States — or, secondly, in the 
comiilete establishment of the influence of the 
slave power over the free — or else, on the other 
hand, in the establishment of the superior iuflu- 



6 



ence of Freedom over the interests of Slaverj'. It I 
will not be terminated by a voluntary secession I 
of either party. Commercial interests bind tlie 
slave States and the free States together in links | 
of gold that are riveted ^vith iron, and they can- • 
not be broken by passion or by ambition. Either j 
party Avill submit to the ascendency of the other 



rather than vield the commercial advantaares of 



this Union. Political ties bind the Union togctli- j 
er — a common necessity, and not merely a com- j 
mon necessity, but the common interests of em- | 
pire — of such empire as the woild has never | 
before seen. The control of the national power | 
is the control of the great Western Continent ; j 
and the control of this continent is to be in a 
very few years the controllins: influence in the i 
world. ^Vho is there, North, that hates Slavery 
so much, or vvho, Soutli, that hates emancipation ; 
so intensely, that he can attempt, with any hope ' 
of success, to break a Union thus forged and 
welded together? I have always heard, with 
equal pity and disgust, threats of disunion in tlie 
free States, and similar threats in the slavehold- 
ing States. I know that men may rave in the 
heat of passion, and under great political excite- 
ment; but I know tliat when it comes to a ques- 
tion whether this Union shall stand, either with 
Freedom or with Slavery, the masses Avill uphold 
it, and it will stand until some inherent vice in 
its Constitution, not yet disclosed, shall cause its 
dissolution. Now, entertaining these oj)inions, 
there are for me only two alternatives, viz: cither j 
to let Slavery gain unlimited sv.'ay, or so to exert ! 
what little power and intluence I may have, as to ] 
secure, if I can, the ultimate predominance ofj 
Freedom. j 

In doing this, I do no more than those who be- 
lieve the Slave Power is rightest, wisest, and I 
best, are doing, and will continue to do, with ni}' j 
free consent, to establish its complete supremacy. 
If they shall succeed, 1 still shall be, as I have 
been, a loyal citizen. If we succeed, I know 
they will be loyal also, because it will be safest, 
wisest, and best, for them to be so. The question 
is one, not of a day, or of a year, but of many 
years, and, for aught I know, many generations. 
Like all other great political questions, it will be 
attended sometimes loy excitement, sometimes by 
passion, and sometimes, perhaps, even by fac- 
tion ; but it is sure to be settled in a constitu- 
tional way, without any violent shock to society, 
or to any of its great interests. It is, moreover, 
sure to be settled rightly : because it will be set- 
tled under the benign influences of Republican- 
ism and Christianity, according to the principles 
of truth and justice, as ascertained by human 
reason. In pursuing such a course, it seems to 
me obviously as wise as it is necessary to save 
all existing laws and Constitutions which are 
conservative of Freedom, and tv permit, as for 
as possible, the establishment of no new ones in 
favor of Slavery ; and thus to turn away the 
thoughts of the States which tolerate Slavery 
from political efforts to perpetuate what in its 
nature cannot be ])erpetual, to the more wise and 
benign policy of emancipation. 

This, in my humble judgment, is the simple, 
easy path ol duly for the American statesman. I 



will not contemplate that other alternative— the ' 
greater ascendency of the Slave Power. I believe. 
that if it ever .^hall come, the A'oice of Frceiliim'' 
will cease to be heard in these Halls, whativ, r 
may be the evils and dangers which Slavery shall 
produce. I say this without disrespect for Rep- 
resentatives of sli^ve States, and I say it because 
the rights of petition and of debate on that 
subject are effectually suppressed — necessarily 
suppressed — in all the slave States, and 1)J- 
cause they are not always held in revereina 
even now, in the two Houses of Congro. 
Yv'hen freedom of speech on a sul)ject of "sik 1j 
vital interest shall have ceased to exist in Con- 
gress, then I shall expect to see Slavery not ohly 
luxuriating in all new Territories, but' stealthily' 
creeping even into the free States themsch\,". 
Believing this, and believing, also, that compKto 
responsibility of the Government to the people is 
essential to public and private safety, and that 
decline and ruin are sure to follow, always, on 
the train of Slavery, I am sure that this will be 
no longer a land of Freedom and constitutional 
liberty when Slavery shall have thus become 
paramount. Aiiferre intcidare falsis nominibiis i.n- 
jyerium atquc uii soiitiidinem faciitnt pacem appel- 
lant. 

Sir, I have always said that I should not de- 
spond, even if this fearful measure should be 
effected; nor do I now despond. Although, rea- 
soning from my present convictions, I should not 
have voted for the compromise of 1820, I have 
labored, in the ver\' spirit of those who establish- ; 
ed it, to save the landmark of Freedom which it j 
assigned. I have not spoken irreverently, even I 
of the compromise of 1850, which, as all men 
know, I opposed earnestly and with diligence. 
Nevertheless. I have always preierred the com- 
promises of the Constitution, and have wanted no 
others. I feared all others. This was a leading 
principle of the great statesman of the South, 
[Mr. Calhoux.] Said he : 

"I see my way in the Constitution; I cannot • 
' in a compromise. A compromise is but an a; t 
' of Congress. It may be overruled at any tim ■. 
' It gives us no security. But the Constitution is 
' a statute. It is a rock on which we can stand, 
' and on which we can meet our friends from the 
' non-slav#fiolding States. It is a firm and stable 
' ground, on which we can better stand in oppo- 
' sition to fanaticism than on the shilling sands 
< of compromise. Let us be done with compru- 
' mises. Let us go back and stand upon the 
' Constitution." 

I stood upon this ground in 18r>0, defending 

Freedom upon it as Mr"! CALnoix did in defending 

Slaverv. I was overruled then, and 1 have wait- 

I ed since without proposing to abrogate any com- 

1 promises. 

It has been no proposition of mine to abrogate 
them now; but the proposition has come from 
another quarter— from an adverse one. It is 
about to prevail. The shifting sands of compro- 
mise are passing from under my feet, and they 
are now, without agency of my own. taking hold 
again on the rock' of the Constitution. It shall 
be no fault of mine if they do not rem.ain firm. 
This seems to me auspicious of better days and 



^i,er le^'islation. Through all the darkness and 
eloom of the present hour, bright stars are break- ; 
ino- that inspire me ^^-ilh hope, and excite me to . 
perseverance. They show that the day of com- | 
promises has passed forever, and that hencefor- , 
vs-ard all great questions between Freedom and , 
Slavery leoitimatelv coming here— and none other j 
can come-shall be decided, as they ought to be, ; 
upon their merits, by a fair exercise of legislative 
power, and not by bargains ot equivocal prudence, 
if not of doubtful morality. _ 

The House of Representatives has, and it al- 
ways will have, an increasing majority of mem- 
bers from the free States. On this occasion, that 
House has not been altogether faithless to the in- 
tere==ts of the free States ; for although it has | 
taken away the charter of Freedom from Kansas [ 
and Nebraska, it has at the same time told this | 
proud body, in language which compels acquies- , 
cence that in submitting the question oi its res- i 
torati'on, it would submit it not merely to inter- 
ested citizens, but to the alien inhabitants ot the | 
Territories also. So the great interests of human- , 
itv are, after all. thanks to the House of Rcpre- 
se'ntatives, and thanks to Grod, submitted to the 
voice of human nature. _ 

Sir I see one more sign of hope. The great 

support of Slavery in the South has been its 

alliance with the Democratic parly of the ^orth. 

By means of that alliance it obtained paramount 

influence in this Government about the year 1800 



which, from that time to this, with but few and 
slieht interruptions, it has maintained. While 
Democracy in the North has thus been support- 
ing Slavery in the South, the people of the North 
have been learning more profoundly the princi- 
ples of republicanism and of free government. It 
is an extraordinarj- circumstance, wliich you, sir, 
the present occupant of the chair, [Mr. Stuart,] 
I am sure will not gainsay, that at this moment, 
when there seems to be a more complete diverg- 
ence of the Federal Government in iavor of Sla- 
very than ever before, the sentiment of Universal 
Liberty is stronger in all free States than it ever 
was before. With that principle the present 
Democratic party must now come into a closer 
contest. Their 'prestige of Democracy is fast 
waning, bv reason of the hard service which their 
allianc^e with their slaveholding b.rethren has 
imposed upon them. That party perseveres, as 
indeed it must, by reason of its very constitution, 
in that service, and thus comes into closer con- 
flict with elements of true Democracy, and for 
that reason is destined to lose, and is fast losing 
the power which it has held so firmly and so 
long. That power will not be restored until the 
principle established here now shall be reversed, 
and a Constitution shall be given, not only to 
Kansas and Nebraska, but also to every other 
national Territory-, which will be not a tabula 
rasa, but a Constitution securing equal, univer- 
' sal, and perpetual Freedom. 



BuELL & Blanchard, Printers, Washington, D. C. 



'^' 



/ 



